[websiteapi]

all of that and they basically just got lucky. the guy walked to brown from his car parked nearby and shot up some kids, waited days, went to a guy's house in Massachusetts, killed him and never even got caught - he committed suicide and was only found days after his second killing

if anything this whole saga makes me happy smart people aren't killers more often because this guy basically got away...

[nervousvarun]

I keep seeing this sort of sentiment everywhere and I'm trying to understand it. The same thing happened after Charlie Kirk was killed and the arrest there hinged on a confession by the killer to his dad. A lot of commentary then that the police/FBI got lucky. Ditto Mangione. They got lucky he was found in a random McDonalds.

What exactly is the expectation here? Is there some sort of wide-spread belief that the world works like an episode of Law and Order and every crime is instantly solved by rolling up your sleeves and doing good old fashioned detective work?

Would assume for the majority of planned murder to be resolved as quickly as these highly publicized cases have been (the Kirk deal took about 2 days also) there's going to have to be an element of luck. Piecing together digital/forensic evidence is going to require time and effort. If it's not an obvious connection (domestic violence etc.) and there's no direct witnesses it seems logical you only have a few outcomes:

A) Going to be solved due to a lucky break

B) Going to be solved after a ton of time/interviews/piecing together forensic evidence

C) Not be solved.

Also he only "got away" because he killed himself. They likely would have caught him fairly soon after this because they had his identity from the car tags. I guess the point is though luck is all you have if it's solved this quickly because it's so random.

[asdff]

The sentiment is basically that the "all hands on deck" manpower effort is futile and if anything even a political/propaganda effort to dissuade others from having similar thoughts. What good is it to mobilize 1000 FBI agents if they aren't going to move the case forward at all? What good is having a budget capable of mobilizing that many people for a single case and not to bear any fruit with it? Is this outcome better than what might have happened if this were relegated to local PD? Surprisingly the answer is "no, not at all." That is a big indictment on federal law enforcement and their abilities to turn their budget into actionable effort that makes the population safer. And probably suggests that such resource draining manhunts might even come at the cost of whatever the FBI does in fact do well.

[d0gsg0w00f]

Half of life is collective "give a damn". If you see 1000 FBI agents, read 47 headlines, and hear a dozen gas station conversations then you start to tune in. That's when the tips start coming in, as everyone wants to be part of the big "thing".

[BobbyTables2]

A lot of fiction will be generated too

[chongli]

Then it’s a good thing you have a lot of people available to sort through it!

[hluska]

It’s easy to criticize a police investigation after the suspect has been caught. But in the moment, none of the responding officers had a clue what they were walking into. Brown is a large campus in a strongly residential neighbourhood with many hiding spots; and people were ordered to shelter in place.

[BurningFrog]

There is always going to be a PR element in police efforts.

In a democracy you need to show the voters you're doing work.

[MangoToupe]

The society of the spectacle needs a spectacle!

[reed1234]

Isn’t that hindsight bias?

[makeitdouble]

> Is there some sort of wide-spread belief that the world works like an episode of Law and Order and every crime is instantly solved by rolling up your sleeves and doing good old fashioned detective work?

There is to a point, and it's not some random organic sentiment: this is the image that has been crafted for decades, if not centuries. The police has a role in pushing it, but it's also has been a useful fiction for our societies as a whole.

"crime will somewhat get punished" has more weight with a competent agency with at least average intelligent people.

[idrios]

You're missing a 4th and unsettling option:

D) Going to be "solved" by catching someone unfortunate who seems plausible enough and lacks an alibi.

[websiteapi]

I disagree that his catching was inevitable. They only knew an identity yesterday. If the suspect wasn’t a coward it’s plausible they could’ve just driven away to literally any other part of the United States and then flew back to Portugal. I have no comment on the Kirk case.

As for the expectation, other than if civil liberties are going to be violated in the name of safety I expect much faster results, and I’m sure the MIT professors family would agree.

[nervousvarun]

How could they possibly have solved it faster than this? There's no magic to this and it takes time like anything else. Yes there's digital footage but someone has to go through it. The murder in Massachusetts isn't immediately obviously related.

Of course the family wants it solved right away but there's a reality to this that seems to be overlooked here but is also not unique here. A lot of murders are never solved. Luck is a factor all the time.

[websiteapi]

I am not saying luck isn't a factor - you're missing my point which is we're compromising privacy and going further into a surveillance state, yet it's not like the actual outcomes are improving.

I'm not really sure what you think I'm arguing.

[techdmn]

I have a theory, it would be great if someone would do a rigorous study to back me up! Ha. I'm most likely wrong, but anyway:

The more effort a state puts into surveiling its population, the more effort law enforcement will put into suppressing dissent, and less into addressing crimes targeting the general populous.

[ribosometronome]

Portugal extradites.

[xrd]

Just checking, are you sure this is the story: "hinged on a confession by the killer to his dad." It seems that story is a-changing and that's an important note. My point might be that what is put out as the story often comes with an agenda.

[wildlogic]

This is a reference I think to the Charlie Kirk murder.

[ecshafer]

If you watch some of the real life detective / crime shows. The people who murder people and get caught be cops, basically shoot people in broad daylight on camera, tell people about it, then immediately fold in interrogation.

[mc32]

People often fold during an interrogation/questioning unless they are career criminals and have been through the system and learn from their prior mistakes/luck.

[BobaFloutist]

Innocent people often fold during interrogation.

[mc32]

Sure, but in the 21st century people are typically not thrown in prison on the basis of a confession only. The prosecutors have to have corroborating evidence.

We do have criminals who fold, either they're too confident, they trip up, etc. Recently some guy killed his sugar-momma in Fla, then took her car and drive it cross country to Seattle and along the way used her CC. He gave it all away in the jail interview.

[rectang]

In the 21st century, innocent people routinely accept plea deals to avoid the risk of trial. The corroborating evidence need not be strong because the threat of the trial penalty is enough when you can't afford a good lawyer.

https://innocenceproject.org/coerced-pleas/

[pixl97]

>The prosecutors have to have corroborating evidence.

Bla bla bla, prosecutors are the good guys and show all the evidence they have....

Um, not.

We keep finding again and again we're putting innocent people in jail even for things as serious as capital crimes, and later it was found the investigation was botched and there was no evidence that person was guilty and other evidence was never presented.

[naijaboiler]

wrong. confession is the pimary way most people get convicted

[olalonde]

Or unless they exercise their right to remain silent.

[mothballed]

Yes but if you do it wrong then your silence can be used against you. And if you ask for a lawyer slightly incorrectly then that doesn't count either.

[duskdozer]

Well, how exactly were they supposed to know he wanted a lawyer and not a lawyerdog, whatever that is? I don't even think that's a real thing! Clearly the suspect was crazy.

[almosthere]

I mentioned to someone that day that the person would be caught by a family member - that this stuff was looking more and more like Mangione - who was also primarily caught by his mom. That being said, the only reason family ends up ratting these people out is because of the high pressure it ends up on the family. If it turns out they find these people, and the family did not turn them in, they are going to the big house too.

[watwut]

> the only reason family ends up ratting these people out is because of the high pressure it ends up on the family.

That is not true. There was no pressure on unabomber brother - he "ratted" him out entirely on own will. Also Elliot Rodgers parents called police after they read the manifesto - before any pressure happened. Ex wife of DC shootings had restraining order on him, feared him, and when police asked whether she thinks he is capable of violence like that her first answer was "yes".

The thing also is, these people are often assholes in their own lives, toward relatives too. They tend to have track record of domestic violence and abuse.

[almosthere]

Other than going left leaning Robinson was not hated by his family, but when they found out they immediately got the police involved. Same with Mangione (not with the left leaning aspect, but the familial love).

I'm not saying your angle is wrong - it's just that one way or another they'll be turned in.

[expedition32]

In my country if the police is really serious, and I mean national crisis level of serious, they can go full China and track everyone. They have the means.

Like presumably the US has doorbell camera databases and every car on the highway is electronically flagged?

[firesteelrain]

Flock is around but it’s not as prevalent as some would want you to believe. At least not yet.

Ring cameras and other cameras still require warrant. Same for the data that Flock collects

[DaSHacka]

> Ring cameras and other cameras still require warrant. Same for the data that Flock collects

That data is now one and the same though:

https://www.flocksafety.com/blog/flock-safety-and-ring-partn...

[shbooms]

It depends where you are. most cities in the US have them everywhere now

[stocksinsmocks]

D) the FBI stitches it up to protect the real criminals and brings out some poor fool to take the blame.

[agoodusername63]

I believe the theory that Mangione even wanted to be caught and arrested because he didn't see a viable life for himself anymore with his spinal problems and medical bills. Who social engineers their way into getting a CEO's itinerary and then keeps a manifesto on their person well after the crime

Now he doesn't have to worry about paying for that. Or getting reasonable treatment but hey,

[_vqpz]

It's a fun theory that everyone likes to support but it falls apart when you read his Reddit account and realize he had insurance that paid for spinal fusion surgery and claimed to have no pain afterwards without the assistance of medication. That's probably also why he doesn't appear in any pain in his appearances since the incident, not because the NY DOC (infamous for their terrible healthcare) magically got him surgery instantly.

[firesteelrain]

He became radicalized over time and even wrote that his pain was improved. Somewhere along the way he read something or got it into his head that he had to murder the United Healthcare CEO where he never was a customer. It was just one if not the largest healthcare insurance company.

[SV_BubbleTime]

I can’t speak to his thinking, but being caught with the gun used, and a confession letter…

Tells me he knew he was going to be caught and is angling for a hung jury.

[WillPostForFood]

"this guy basically got away"

Titanic basically sailed safely across the Atlantic, except for a bit of bad luck.

[WalterBright]

The Titanic disaster was a confluence of many instances of bad luck. Including the idea that if the lookout had noticed the berg a few seconds later, it wouldn't have sunk.

(Because then it would have hit the berg head on, crushing the front, but not ripping most of the side open.)

[dustincoates]

Being smart doesn't guarantee you'll get away with murder: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_and_Loeb

[card_zero]

Sometimes criminology students kill people, apparently as research: Bryan Kohberger, Nasen Saadi.

[c22]

Actually being smart guarantees you won't have to.

[pixl97]

Na, if you're smart you just start a company and have it kill people via industrial accident, then it's just a fine.

[bagels]

But they found him? If he was alive, he probably would have been caught eventually, no?

[SoftTalker]

Maybe. The average homicide clearance rate in the US is only around 60%. But that includes a lot of killings where nobody really cares about anyone involved. This was a much higher profile crime so it would get a lot more attention. But there are high profile cases that get a lot of (at least local) attention that don't ever get solved either.

[seanmcdirmid]

It is really difficult to ascertain motive and suspects when it’s a chronic homeless case getting murdered. It could be a thing from drugs to just looking at a crazy guy wrong one night, you literally have no leads unless there is a video or some other piece of hard evidence. It isn’t really about caring, judt that the environment they live in is so chaotic and uncontrolled that you’d have a suspect pool that is too big to reasonably investigate.

[bagels]

Sorry, to make my point more clear: They knew the identity of the killer, and this is part of how they found his dead body. If he hadn't killed himself, they would have found him regardless, since they knew who he was, and knew the license plate of the car he was driving.

[websiteapi]

I mean I guess all criminals die or are caught, yes.

[tayo42]

50% of murders are unsolved